ArticleJMIR medical informatics2024
An Empirical Evaluation of Prompting Strategies for Large Language Models in Zero-Shot Clinical Natural Language Processing: Algorithm Development and Validation Study.
Article in JMIR medical informatics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 96 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
96 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Large Language Models in Colorectal Cancer Care and Clinical Decision Support: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Pooled it
- Evaluating ChatGPT-4o as an Educational Support Tool for the Emergency Management of Dental Trauma: Randomized Controlled Study Among Students.JMIR medical education · 2025Trial
- Development and Exploratory Evaluation of a Large Language Model-Supported Scoping Review Workflow.Journal of medical systems · 2026Article
- Automating the triage of rheumatology outpatient referrals: a comparative evaluation of 23 large language models under simple and advanced prompting.Rheumatology international · 2026Article
- AI-Based Structured Information Extraction From Synthetic Nursing Handover Transcripts: Comparative Evaluation of Large Language Models.JMIR nursing · 2026Article
- Reliability, Readability, and Safety of Generative AI Chatbots for Osteoporosis Health Counseling: A Multidimensional Cross-Sectional Comparative Study.Health science reports · 2026Article
- Automated Brief Hospital Course Summarization in Cardiac Surgery Using a Lightweight Large Language Model-Based Framework: Development and Evaluation Study on the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care-IV.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Large Language Models for Ankle Fracture Classification and Management Prediction from Routine Clinical Documentation: A Single-Center Exploratory Study.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2026Article
- Large Language Models for Heterogeneous Data Mining in Liver Disease: Framework Development and Retrospective Validation Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Evaluating large language models for lay summaries of radiology reports using tailored prompting strategies and mixed-method assessment.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
- The Performance of Large Language Models in Extracting Intestinal Symptoms From Electronic Health Records: Retrospective Observational Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Observational
- Role prompting modulates linguistic style but not clinical decision structure in GPT-5 tumour board simulation.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Evaluation of Large Language Models in Generating Physical Exercise Rehabilitation Programs for Musculoskeletal Disorders Across Multiple Clinical Scenarios.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Effect of evaluation prompt strategies on LLM-as-a-judge reliability in critical care.Anaesthesiology intensive therapy · 2026Article
- Mapping the Reliability-Readability Gap in the Education of Patients With Age-Related Macular Degeneration Across 6 Large Language Models: Comparative Evaluation Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2026Article
- Factors Shaping Trust and Satisfaction With AI Medical Chatbots: A Mixed Methods Vignette Survey of Caregivers Seeking Guidance on Pediatric Infectious Diseases.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Feasibility of Tailoring Artificial Intelligence-Assisted Ambient Scribes for Intensive Care Unit Rounds: Algorithm Development and Validation.JMIR medical informatics · 2026Article
- Large language model ensemble for automated TNM staging from radiology reports.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- Large language model-generated clinical summaries in emergency departments: A blinded comparison study.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
- Evaluation of Large Language Models for Structured Data Extraction From Interstitial Lung Disease Clinical Notes: Comparative Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
36 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundLarge language models (LLMs) have shown remarkable capabilities in natural language processing (NLP), especially in domains where labeled data are scarce or expensive, such as the clinical domain. However, to unlock the clinical knowledge hidden in these LLMs, we need to design effective prompts that can guide them to perform specific clinical NLP tasks without any task-specific training data. This is known as in-context learning, which is an art and science that requires understanding the strengths and weaknesses of different LLMs and prompt engineering approaches.
objectiveThe objective of this study is to assess the effectiveness of various prompt engineering techniques, including 2 newly introduced types-heuristic and ensemble prompts, for zero-shot and few-shot clinical information extraction using pretrained language models.
methodsThis comprehensive experimental study evaluated different prompt types (simple prefix, simple cloze, chain of thought, anticipatory, heuristic, and ensemble) across 5 clinical NLP tasks: clinical sense disambiguation, biomedical evidence extraction, coreference resolution, medication status extraction, and medication attribute extraction. The performance of these prompts was assessed using 3 state-of-the-art language models: GPT-3.5 (OpenAI), Gemini (Google), and LLaMA-2 (Meta). The study contrasted zero-shot with few-shot prompting and explored the effectiveness of ensemble approaches.
resultsThe study revealed that task-specific prompt tailoring is vital for the high performance of LLMs for zero-shot clinical NLP. In clinical sense disambiguation, GPT-3.5 achieved an accuracy of 0.96 with heuristic prompts and 0.94 in biomedical evidence extraction. Heuristic prompts, alongside chain of thought prompts, were highly effective across tasks. Few-shot prompting improved performance in complex scenarios, and ensemble approaches capitalized on multiple prompt strengths. GPT-3.5 consistently outperformed Gemini and LLaMA-2 across tasks and prompt types.
conclusionsThis study provides a rigorous evaluation of prompt engineering methodologies and introduces innovative techniques for clinical information extraction, demonstrating the potential of in-context learning in the clinical domain. These findings offer clear guidelines for future prompt-based clinical NLP research, facilitating engagement by non-NLP experts in clinical NLP advancements. To the best of our knowledge, this is one of the first works on the empirical evaluation of different prompt engineering approaches for clinical NLP in this era of generative artificial intelligence, and we hope that it will inspire and inform future research in this area.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.